Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region

Branch 76, Makati City

JASON ISAAC T. BENITEZ

Petitioner,

-versus- CIVIL CASE No. MC-45678

For Declaration of Absolute
Nullity of Marriage
SANZA S. BENITEZ
Respondent.
X--------------------------------------X

TRIAL MEMORANDUM
(For the Petitioner)

PETITIONER, by counsel and to this Honorable Court, most

respectfully submits his Trial Memorandum, thus:

PREFATORY STATEMENT
Article 36 of the Family Code, in classifying marriages contracted by
a psychologically incapacitated person as a nullity, should be deemed as an
implement of this constitutional protection of marriage. Given the avowed
State interest in promoting marriage as the foundation of the family, which
in turn serves as the foundation of the nation, there is a corresponding
interest for the State to defend against marriages ill-equipped to promote
family life. Void ab initio marriages under Article 36 do not further the
initiatives of the State concerning marriage and family, as they promote
wedlock among persons who, for reasons independent of their will, are not
capacitated to understand or comply with the essential obligations of
marriage (Kalaw vs. Fernandez, G.R. No. 166357, 14 January 2015).

I. THE PETITION
1.1 This is a petition for declaration of absolute nullity of a
void marriage under Article 36 of the Family Code.

II. STATEMENT OF FACTS AND OF THE CASE

2.1 Petitioner and Respondent were married on June 17,
2010 at a marriage ceremony solemnized in Makati City. A certified copy of
the marriage certificate Registry No. 2010-1234 was marked as Exhibit A.

2.2 They have one (1) child: Arya Benitez born on

November 13, 2017. The certificate of live birth was marked as Exhibit B.

1
PETITIONERS CAUSES OF ACTION/ALLEGATIONS:
2.3 Petitioners first cause of action roots from inability and
incapacity of the respondent to comply with the essential and basic
obligations of marriage which runs counter to the requirements of Article 68,
Article 71, and Article 220 of the Family Code. Because of respondents
alcoholism and addiction to mah-jong which became active again because of
respondents signs of jealousy, respondent was unable to take good care of
their only child. In fact, it was petitioners mother, childs grandma who
assumed the obligation of taking care of petitioner and respondents only
child. Furthermore, respondent was also incapable of observing respect,
render mutual help and support to the Petitioner because of respondents
insecurities.

2.4 Petitioners second cause of action is that the respondent

is suffering from BORDERLINE PERSONALITY DISORDER, which, as
founded by the Clinical Psychologist they consulted, is grave, serious, and
incurable. According to the petitioner, respondents disorder was already
manifested before the celebration of their marriage. These observations by
the petitioner were supported by an expert witness. Petitioner avers that no
matter how much understanding and patience petitioner gave to the
respondent, his efforts and love were still not enough to save their marriage.

2.5 Petitioners third cause of action is that he should be

granted custody of their only child, as respondent is incapable of being a
good mother to their only child.

RESPONDENTS POSITION
2.6 Respondent is not a college graduate but is smart and
good with people. She has a lot of friends she would go out with. Her
friendly personality was often misinterpreted. She has varied interests which
led her to shift courses in college. This resulted in her not getting her degree
but this does not deter her from pursuing the things she likes and she
believes she can be successful even without a degree. She did not feel
inferior for lack of a diploma and would often say it does not define her.

2.7 When petitioner encouraged her to finish her degree, he

insisted on a course that she didnt like and she felt she did not need it.
Petitioner argued that since he helped in the school expenses, she should at
least consider taking the course he wanted her to take. This did not work out
so respondent dropped out of school two months into the term.

2.8 Respondents family background made her a little cynical

about love but when she met petitioner she felt she could believe in a happy
marriage. She made her stand that being with petitioner should not keep her
from socializing with her friends who were there for her when she was

2
without her family. Respondent emphasized that they are the family she
didnt have.

2.9 Respondents shy and quiet behaviour in front of other

people is often mistaken as insecurity. She just takes longer to connect with
people and get close to them even for petitioners family. The words she
uttered during the wedding to Annie, petitioners bestfriend, were triggered
by the closeness she saw with the way petitioner and Annie hugged and held
hands during her wedding. She felt it was inappropriate and that there was
something in the way they hugged.

2.10 Respondent is a good cook and can bake goodies. She

started a cupcake business that was doing well and started earning. To
amuse herself in times when she had nothing to do, she played occasional
mah-jong with her friends.

2.11 After giving birth, respondent was thankful for the help
and support of petitioners mother in caring for their child Arya. She
entrusted Arya to her mother-in-law knowing that her baby would be better
cared for. She would still care for Arya and was close to her daughter. Her
time with her friends did not keep her from caring for her child.

2.12 The jealous streaks that respondent showed were

triggered by petitioners lack of attention to her. When petitioner became
officemates with his ex-girlfriend Katherine, he would come home later than
usual. This made her suspect something might be going on between him and
his ex. She was always at home and would leave only when she would go
out with friends which compounded her jealous feeling. She felt in the latter
part of their marriage that petitioner did not find her a good enough wife.
Her insecurity was brought to the fore when petitioner would tell her that if
she had finished her studies she would have been working and helping with
the finances. She felt that she wasnt enough for petitioner in the little things
he does and in his silence. She was made to feel inadequate.

III. PETITIONERS EVIDENCE

THE WHIRLWIND COURTSHIP

3.1. Petitioner herein alleges that ever since they met,
respondent was known to him as a person who easily gets irritated and
annoyed. She is impatient and has erratic and unpredictable behaviors.
However, the petitioner was challenged at first with the kind of attitude the
respondent shown him. When petitioner was still courting the respondent,
respondent already exhibited jealousy of petitioners childhood best friend
Annie (A testimony made by Annie is herein presented as evidence).
Respondent even threatened petitioners best friend to keep her distance with
the petitioner. Petitioner was informed of this incident. Because of
respondents attitude, petitioner was lead to think twice if he will still

3
continue courting the respondent. Only a month after they met, petitioner
and respondent established their romantic relationship.

3.2 They had several sexual encounters even without formal

commitment as boyfriend and girlfriend. It was only eight (8) months after
when they became official boyfriend and girlfriend.

AS BOYFRIEND-GIRLFRIEND
3.3 Petitioner and Respondent became official boyfriend and
girlfriend only after eight (8) months. During the initial stage of their
relationship, Petitioner discovered that Respondent sometimes go out and
party with her friends without informing the petitioner. Petitioner did not
treat it as an issue between them. No matter how moody Respondent is, the
Petitioner still tries to understand the Respondent.

3.4 Petitioner has known the Respondent as sweet but

sometimes irritable, and cheerful but sometimes problematic. Petitioner
thought that he was already used to Respondents moodiness.

3.5 As narrated by the Petitioner, Respondent sometimes feel

inferior because she was not able to graduate and obtain a college diploma.
Thus, Petitioner convinced the Respondent to finish her college degree. It
was already known to the Petitioner that Respondent already shifted thrice
before she stopped pursuing her college degree (A certified copy of
respondents scholastic records from San Sebastian College was marked as
Exhibit C) but Petitioner still encouraged the Respondent in order to boost
Respondents self-esteem. In fact, Petitioner helped the Respondent with her
expenses for enrolment (A copy of the enrolment form was marked as
Exhibit D). However, it was only after two (2) months when Respondent
told the Petitioner that Respondent no longer wanted to go to school.

3.6 One day, Respondent revealed to the Petitioner that

Respondents parents were separated when she was just seven (7) years old.
Respondent also told the Petitioner that Respondent lived with different
relatives until she reached sixteen (16) years old and finished her Secondary
Education. Respondent also became an alcoholic ever since she studied in
Manila to finish her college education. In fact, Respondent and Petitioner
met in a bar or club where Respondent and her group of friends used to
spend their nights party-ing and drink-ing. These stories from the
Respondent made the petitioner believe that Respondent needs him to be
there for her.

RESPONDENTS INTRODUCTION TO PETITIONERS FAMILY

3.7 On March 2010, Petitioner introduced Respondent to his
family only three (3) months before their wedding. Respondent told the
Petitioner that she was very excited to meet Petitioners family. Respondent
also told the Petitioner that she would like to be closed to Petitioners
parents and siblings. However, when that day of introduction arrived,

4
respondent was just quiet and after almost three (3) hours already requested
to leave.

THE WEDDING
3.8 It was June 17, 2010 when their wedding day arrived.
Petitioner and Respondent, as well as their families were very happy.
Respondent even asked the petitioner to invite petitioners best friend
Annie. Petitioner asked respondent if she was sure of it and that if it
wont be an issue with the respondent. Respondent confirmed that its fine
with her and told the petitioner Aattend lang naman sya ng wedding natin
diba.. Wala naman masama dun. Besides, past na yun.. I want us to be good
friends. So youll be happier. At the reception, respondent was very
accommodating with their guests. However, when respondent saw petitioner
and Annie talking in the garden a mile away from where the guests were,
respondent became angry. Respondent even throw the content of the glass
wine in front of Annie. Respondent became shameful and shouted at
petitioner and his bestfriend Annie, saying So, hanggang dito sa kasal
namin eeksena ka pa din? Wala ka talagang hiya! These scandalous words
were even heard by petitioner and Annies friends (Two of petitioner and
Annies friends herein testify as witnesses). Even the security guard of the
venue of their reception saw and heard that scene (The security guard herein
testifies as witness against the respondent). What started as a romantic and
peaceful night ended with a mess.

RESPONDENTS ALCOHOLISM, VICES, INSECURITIES, SELF-

PITY, AND LACK OF SUPPORT TO THE FAMILY
3.9 Because Respondent did not finish her college degree,
she had a difficulty looking for a job. Thus, Petitioner shouldered all the
expenses of their family. Since Respondent loves baking cupcakes,
Petitioner encouraged the respondent to sell cupcakes that she herself baked
in order to earn her own money. Petitioner provided respondent with
P50,000.00 capital for Respondents start up business. During the first six
(6) months of respondents cupcake business, a lot of customers gave nice
feedbacks. Respondent began to earn at least P15,000 a month (Copies of
the receipts were marked as Exhibit E). However, Respondent did not
even attempt to give her share for the household and other expenses.

3.10 The Petitioner has no idea where the Respondent is

spending her earnings, until he discovered that the Respondent became
addicted to Mah-Jong. Further, Respondent again became addicted to
alcohol. It became her defense mechanism to drink alcohol whenever he lost
the game. This repeatedly occurred for almost three (3) years, until
Respondent became pregnant with their firstbaby. Respondent became more
insecure as she is getting fatter. There were times when respondent would
make up stories because of her insecurities. Respondents jealousy and
insecurities became severe when respondent learned that the former
girlfriend of Petitioner, named Katherine became Petitioners officemate.
There were even times when she would call up the superior of petitioner in

5
the office and would tell the superior about their arguments (The superior
hereto testifies as witness).

3.11 On November 13, 2013, their first baby was born. They
named their first baby Arya. Because Respondent and their new baby
needs someone to look after them during the first week after Respondent
gave birth, Petitioner requested her mother, whom they call Mamita to
stay in their house. Since Arya is their first grandchild, Petitioners mother
did not have second thoughts on Petitioners request. Since Respondent is
always outside the house, playing mah-jong with her amigas, it was
petitioners mother who always attended to Arya all the time.
3.12 Whenever Petitioner would arrive late, after 10 oclock in
the evening, Respondent would nag at the Petitioner. Respondent would
even throw the vases and plates inside the house because of her anger. There
was also a time when a broken glass wounded petitioners arms (A copy of
the medical certificate was marked as Exhibit F and testimony of the maid
is being offered as testimonial evidence).

3.13 Because of several misunderstandings and quarrels

between Petitioner and Respondent, the mother of Petitioner suggested that
that they seek a Marriage Counselor and a Psychologist. On January 18,
2016, Petitioner and Respondent sought the help of clinical psychologist, Dr.
Noel B. Ison. Mr. Noel N. Ison subjected both the petitioner and respondent
to a series of tests and evaluation in order to determine what or who causes
the conflict between them.

3.14 According to the findings of the clinical psychologist (A

certified copy of the neuro-psychological evaluation was marked as Exhibit
G), the Petitioner is suffering from passive-aggressive personality and that
the Respondent is suffering from Borderline Personality Disorder. The
Petition for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage was filed by herein Petitioner
after several times of failed marriage counselling.

PETITIONERS EXPERT WITNESS --DR. NOEL B. ISON

3.15 Expert witness Dr. Noel B. Ison in his Judicial Affidavit
testified that he knew both Petitioner and Respondent because they sought
for his help as clinical psychologist. They started consulting him on January
18, 2016 and follow-up consultations on April 29, 2016, and August 30,
2016.

3.16 Dr. Noel B. Ison administered Revised Beta

Examination, Bender Visual Motor Gestalt Test, Draw A Person Test,
Rorshach Psychodiagnostic Test, Sachs Sentence Completion Test, and
MMPI.

3.17 According to the results of the test, petitioner and

respondent are emotionally immature and recklessly impulsive when they

6
decided to marry each other. Both parties are afflicted with personality
disorder.

3.18 Jason Isaac Benitez, the petitioner in this case, is said to

have PASSIVE-AGGRESSIVE PERSONALITY DISORDER because
although he disagrees with what respondent is doing, he agrees with it,
instead of voicing his negative opinion about it. Rarely expressing hostility
directly is one of the characteristics of most chronically passive-aggressive
individuals. His passive-aggressive behavior is associated with stress.

3.19 Sanza Stark, the respondent in this case is said to have

BORDERLINE PERSONALITY DISORDER. The psychological
assessment reveals that the causes of respondents personality disorder are
Freudian and Genetic Factors. Fixation at the phallic stage which occurred
on ages three to six years brought by the misunderstandings, quarrels, and
separation of respondents parents lead to respondents shallowness and an
inability to engage in intimate relationships. The borderline personality
disorder was inherited by respondent from her mother who also manifested
the same characteristics when she left the respondent at respondents
younger age of seven (7) years.

3.20 Under American Psychiatric Associations Diagnostic

and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), petitioners personality
disorder is characterized under Cluster C while respondents disorder is
characterized under Cluster B. Individuals who have disorders under Cluster
B, appear overly emotional, erratic, and dramatic. Individuals who have
disorders under Cluster C often appear anxious or fearful. Borderline
Personality Disorder under Cluster B is found to be incurable.

3.21 It was also found by Dr. Ison that what respondent

exhibited, as supported by narration of the petitioner, the testimony of other
witnesses, and the result of neuro-psychological evaluation are exact traits of
borderline personality.

3.22 A borderline personality is characterized by a pervasive

pattern of instability of interpersonal relationships, self-image, and affects,
and marked impulsivity, beginning by early adulthood and present in variety
of contexts. Six out of 9 diagnostic criteria found to be present with the
respondent are the following: (1) Frantic efforts to avoid real or imagined
abandonment, (2) A pattern of unstable and intense interpersonal
relationships characterized by alternating between extremes of idealization
and devaluation, (3) Impulsivity in at least two areas that are potentially self-
damagingsuch as substance abuse and spending, (4) Affective instability
due to a marked reactivity of mood, as characterized by irritability and
anxiety lasting for days, (5) Inappropriate, intense anger or difficulty
controlling anger, and (6) Transient, stress-related paranoid ideation or
severe dissociative symptoms.

7
 3.23 One aspect that is very evident is in the area of
respondents personal relationship, where a person with this kind of disorder
cannot cope up with what is expected in a relationship involving
commitment. They are generally in and out of relationships as they do not
have the patience to sustain the ties of the relationship. The behavior is like
that of a child who has to be attended to as they might end up doing things
which are often regrettable. People with this disorder usually do not feel
remorse for their wrongdoings. They have the habit of repeating their
mistakes to the detriment of their own lives and families. People with these
patterns of traits cannot be expected to have lasting and successful
relationships as required in marriage. Parents relationship as revealed by
families of people who also have this disorder usually revealed that it is not
that ideal. If this will be the background of their developing child Arya, it
is likely that her relationship would also end as such.

IV. RESPONDENTS EVIDENCE

4.1 Respondent herself testified on her educational
background, her relationships with her family and friends, how their married
life was, and her claim that she is not psychologically incapacitated;

4.2 Respondent likewise presented an expert witness in the

person of Dr. EZEKIEL DE JESUS, who testified he conducted psychiatric
and psychological examination on the respondent and found that the latter is
not suffering from of BORDERLINE PERSONALITY DISORDER.

4.3 Under the circumstance, in view of the respondents

failure to prove the she is not psychologically incapacitated to perform the
essential obligations of marriage, the instant petitions should be GRANTED.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, in view of all the foregoing, it is most

respectably prayed of this Honorable Court that after due notice and hearing,
a judgment be rendered declaring as null and void the marriage between the
Petitioner, JASON ISAAC T. BENITEZ and the respondent, SANZA S.
BENITEZ on the ground that both of them are psychologically
incapacitated to comply with their respective essential marital obligations
pursuant to Article 36 of the Family Code of the Philippines, as amended.

Petitioner prays for such other relief just and equitable under
the premises.

Makati City, May 15, 2017.

8
 ABEGAIL GUARDIAN
Counsel for the Petitioner
S.C. Roll of Attorneys No. 68888
IBP Lifetime Member No. 011921; 04/04/2015
PTR No. 1123456J; 04/04/2015 Makati City
MCLE Compliance No. IV-001234; 03/11/2015;
Makati City
0915-253-6188
abegailguardian.atty@gmail.com

COPY FURNISHED:

OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL

134 Amorsolo Street, Legaspi Village, Makati City

ATTY. BIANCA BENITEZ

BAUTISTA, BENITEZ, and BUSTO
31st floor, World Trade Center
Makati City

OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR

Makati City

EXPLANATION

(Pursuant to Section 11, Rule 13 of the 1997 Rules of Court)

Due to the nature of the pleading and the lack of personnel to effect
personal service, service was made by registered mail upon the parties and
the court as herein indicated by the corresponding attached registry receipt.

ABEGAIL GUARDIAN

9
Republic of the Philippines )
Makati City ) s.s

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION

AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING

I, JASON ISAAC T BENITEZ, of legal age, Filipino Citizen and with

postal address at Unit 5, Aruga Residence, Rockwell Drive, Makati City,
after having been sworn to in accordance with law, depose and say that:
1. I am the Petitioner in the abovementioned case and I have caused
the preparation of the foregoing Petition for Declaration of Nullity
of Marriage;

2. I have read its contents and understood them and certify them that
they are of my own knowledge or based an authentic record at
hand;

3. I have not commenced any other action or proceeding involving

the same issue/s and subject matter/s in the Supreme Court, the
Court of Appeals, any inferior court, or any other tribunal, quasi-
judicial office or agency; and to the best of our knowledge, no such
action or proceeding is pending in the Supreme Court, the Court of
Appeals, any inferior court, or any other tribunal, quasi-judicial
office or agency.

4. If I should learn thereafter that a similar action or proceeding has

been filed or is pending in the aforementioned courts, tribunal or
agency, I shall inform this Honorable Court of such fact within five
(5) days from notice or knowledge of the same.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have affixed my signature this 15th day

of May, 2017 at Makati City, Philippines.

JASON ISAAC T . BENITEZ

Petitioner/ Affiant

10
 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 15th day of May
2017 at Makati City, Philippines. Affiant, exhibited to me his Social
Security System (SSS) Identification Card with SSS ID No. 12345 issued on
14 March 2015 at Makati City, Philippines. I further certify that I personally
examined the affiant and that I am fully satisfied that he understood the
foregoing statements and that he had voluntarily and freely executed the
same.

WITNESS MY HAND AND SEAL.

Doc No. 20; MICHAEL D. CORPUS

Page No. 6; Notary Public for Makati City
Book No. 47; Appointment No. 5035345
Series of 2017. Until 31 December 2017
153 Cityland Condominium
Dela Rosa., Makati City
Roll of Attorneys No. 91223
IBP No. 654077/ 12-31-2014
PTR No. 14434876/ 12-01-2017
MCLE No. 00123;9/16/16
Commission Serial No.: M-007

11